1 comments about Framing Terrorism: The News Media, the Government and the Public.

1. I never expected to have recieved the book so quickly. I was very surprised and ofcourse pleased to get the call that there was a package for me.
   extremely good service!
   thanks
   best regards,
   Renaat Declercq

4 comments about Christopher Hitchens and His Critics: Terror, Iraq, and the Left.

1. Christopher Hitchens and His Critics: Terror, Iraq, and the Left is an anthology that reprints Mr. Hitchens' work on Terror, Iraq, and the Left. Criticisms of Hitchens' views from his opponets on the left are presened. It is edited by two respectable editors, which is distanced and independant from Mr. Hitchens.
   
   Hitchens provides an Afterword - which is excellent.
   
   I highly recommend the book to both admirers and critics of Christopher Hitchens.



2. This book is refreshingly frank and important. It brings together most of the key writing from the 'battle' which has been raging between Hitchens and his critics from the left since September 11th. The juxtaposition in views is prescient - oftentimes squaring off some of the greatest polemicists of our time.



3. I used to like Christopher Hitchens' essays. But now the grapes have turned sour. It's not just that he has changed his mind; it's his tone that has darkened dramatically. In the agitated piece 'Ha Ha Ha to the Pacifists', he eloquently exclaims: 'Well, ha ha ha, and yah, boo'. Hitchens is angry and anyone who disagrees with him is a fool, or worse. Blame it all on 9/11, sure, but it doesn't always make for great reading. 'Christopher Hitchens and His Critics' is an enlightening book, even if some of his critics - notably Noam Chomsky - declined to take part in it. Most of his adversaries (aka 'enemies') that do contribute, happily join the mudslinging. One of them even offers an 'Obituary for a Former Contrarian'. Distasteful? Maybe not but it really isn't very uplifting either. The book gives us an insight into this whole sorry state of affairs. For this - and an impressive array of invectives - I give it credit. But if you're not familiar with Christopher Hitchens, you'd probably do better by picking up the essays in `For the Sake of Argument' or `Love, Poverty, and War'.



4. This is the best summary of changing Left positions I have seen in recent years. It is must reading for anyone interested, not only in the Left, but also in how the USA and the world intellectuals have become so polarized. The writing (both Hitchens and his critics) is mostly excellent and at times fun to read. Hitchens should have been taken more seriously when he departed the Left both by the Left and by the Bush Administration. This book should be required reading in any class studying the history of modern Iraq.

5 comments about Firehouse.

1. If you are looking for an all encompassing book that looks at the FDNY role on September 11th and the aftermath - this is not that book. (Try "Report from Ground Zero" by Dennis Smith.) If you are looking for a book that looks at 9/11 with a broad view of the significance of that day on several levels, this is not that book. (Try the 9/11 Commission Report.)
   
   What this book represents is small tribute - a thank you, if you will - to the men who lived in David Halberstam's neighborhood, if only in 12 hour shifts. In a narrow sense, it looks at one particular firehouse and the culture of that house. You are given a glimpse of each man and how they were viewed by their "brothers" on the job and in some cases, why it is that they found the FDNY to be their calling. Think of it as a series of extended obituaries not just for each of the twelve men who died, but also for the loss of what had been the culture fostered by all the men stationed in that house.
   
   By portraying each of these twelve men, in a broader sense I think Halberstam is offering up a glimpse of each of the 343 men who died. Each house that lost a member - and numerous houses lost multiple members - likely had someone who filled the "Sergeant Major" roles that Bruce Gary and Jimmy Giberson had within 40/35. I suspect most houses had a funny guy, or a quiet guy, or a guy who didn't easily fit the fireman stereotype. I knew several firemen who died that day (either directly or through my brother who is on the job) and I can see character traits of those I knew in the men profiled in this book.
   
   The quality of Halberstam's writing is well known and doesn't need commentary.



2. 
   Halberstam's lean prose is the appropriate style for this moving portrait of the men at Engine 40, Ladder 35, 12 of whom were killed in the line of duty on 9/11. Each man gets his moment; the portraits are evenhanded, the men shown as human beings rather than super heroes. The events leading up to their final call are incredibly emotional rollercoaster; the day of the disaster is recalled with a devastating clarity. As an examination of the courage of ordinary people faced with extraordinary circumstances, only its brevity keeps this from being a true masterpiece.



3. I don't think you will find any book in which both the author and his subjects are so evenly matched regarding the high quality of work they have put out over the years. Sadly, the firefighters met their match on that sad day where it was their job to run into the direction of tragedy while everyone justifiably were going in the opposite path. Great stories reflect the quality of these individuals and their desire to help others under the worse circumstances.
   
   The other tragedy related to this fine piece is the premature death of the author a few months back in a car accident. If you have never read a book by David Halberstam, please do so. I have read many different books by him on various subjects. He is one of the few people who can write on a subject that I would seemingly have little interest and make it a highly entertaining event just through sheer style and talent. He will be missed.



4. David Halberstam lived 3 blocks away from the 40/35 firehouse on Manhattan's West Side. He had never been in the firehouse or had met any of the firemen. He just carried that healthy respect that most NY'ers have for these men of bravery and courage. When planes flew into the WTC the 40/35 lost 12 of 13 men who had responded. This is their story. Lean prose carries their hearts and souls into ours and we will never forget them.



5. The losses suffered by the FDNY on 11 September 2001 make it by far the most devastating day in the history of American firefighting. The mid-town Manhattan firehouse that is the home to Engine 40 and Ladder 35 sent 13 men to the World Trade Center that morning. Only one survived. This book is a tribute to the bravery and sacrifice of the FDNY and specifically to the men of 40/35, as this firehouse is known.
   
   This is not a detailed account of that terrible day, but instead a profile of the men who were on duty at 40/35 that day. Many were thinking about retirement, having had long, happy careers with the FDNY. Others were still rookies, just learning how to fit in. For each, being a firefighter was more than a job, it was a calling, a lifestyle. In the lives of these men, we get a rare inside look at what it is really like to be a member of the extended family of firefighters. These men knew their jobs were dangerous, and yet never did they hesitate when called.
   
   The final chapter profiles the survivors, the wives and parents left to cope with the staggering reality that their loved ones will never come home. Here we see that the burdens of a firefighter's job and life are carried by more than just the firefighter. They extend to the entire family, and the sacrifice paid by the families is almost too much to believe.
   
   Written with sympathy and simple clarity, this book isn't so much about the disaster at the World Trade Center as it is about the lives of the men who chose to serve the City of New York as firefighters. This is a powerful tribute to some of America's bravest men.

No comments about Counterterrorism Strategies for Corporations: The Ackerman Principles.

2 comments about Root Causes of Terrorism: Myths, Reality and Ways Forward.

1. What this well written academic book does, is that it gives the reader insight into the broad spectrum of the phenomena of terrorism and the theories behind its roots causes--utilizing several international academics whom incorporate, overall, sound methodologies that support and challenge various terrorism theories that have emerged over the last several decades. The only negative critique I propose is that its contributing scholars are predominantly liberal in orientation (which is not necessarily inaccurate in and of itself)--but the contributions of such leading American experts, the likes of Brian Jenkins and Bruce Hoffman, are missing.



2. Bjorgo's collection is an excellent one. It covers most of the major topics that are important for terrorism today. The contributors to the volume are generally experts in the field. To its credit the book does not focus overly much on either the Middle East or Islam; it considers other types of terrorism in other geographical regions. The book is nicely balanced in this regard.

5 comments about U.s. Armed Forces Nuclear, Biological And Chemical Survival Manual.

1. I received this for Christmas from a cousin who is in the National Guard who told me his unit used it for training. I can see why. This is essential stuff...



2. My New Year's resolution was to read this book - and I'm glad that I did. It took hearing about the exploits of Special Forces in Afghanistan and Iraq to make me pick up and read this book by former Navy SEAL Captain Couch. He knows what he's talking about and has given us something straight from military training manuals.



3. As a former SEAL I have read several of Captain Couch's novels and liked them all. I thought that I would take a chance on this book because of his reputation. I am glad I did and have bought several more copies through you all for relatives. There is a wealth of great material here and I'll give the sequel five stars instead of four if it's longer!



4. We assigned writer prepared this recommendation on a lovely, though warm summer day, while butterflies fluttered over a stand of purple thistles. Until he read this book, it seemed like a peaceful scene. Then, it seemed full of threats and hidden perils. He wondered if his building is strong enough to protect against a nuclear attack. What will his family do if someone sprays anthrax spores from a crop duster? Is there a clear spot in the basement to store enough gas masks, and which ones? This book will make you paranoid, too. It says that the threat of an attack is real and growing. You could laugh that off, except that the police just busted an arms dealer for trying to bring missiles into the U.S., except that someone mailed anthrax to strangers, except that there used to be towers at the World Trade Center. Are recommendation - buy this book, read it, then decide whether it is better to prepare or to take your chances. Feeling lucky? At least go buy some flashlight batteries



5. As someone who served in the Army, I have had plenty of NBC training and can say that this book is something that everyone should take the time to read. In fact I learned even more from this book because it is presented in a way that anyone can understand, and it is targeted for use by the civilian population. READ IT, it may save your life one day.

5 comments about Blindfold Game.

1. This book was a different subject content for Stabenow. I consider it one of her best books. It is good reading, entertaining, and fast moving.



2. Dana Stabenow writes forcefully about the majesty of the Alaskan wilderness. I always consider a trip every time I finish one of her stories. The passion to protect her home state and to admire and uphold the native population is as familiar to her as to her favorite brand of coffee. The characters and plot of this book are as challenging as they are engaging. I had to evaluate who had the perception of the most to gain or loose in order to figure out "who-done-it". I really enjoy participating in the climax and ending even when I am wrong.



3. My one complaint with the book was that it was not 100 pages longer. The writing is completely engrossing, from the vividly detailed descriptions both of setting and action to the intriguing plot that built up logically in disclosure as the story went along, yet still managed to have a surprise element in its conclusion. The story is set in the Alaskan waters incorporating the elements of international fishing, the US Coast Guard and modern day bad guys with an ingenious way of carrying out a contemporary threat. Characterization is colorful. Even the bad guys are humanized, though they never to the extent that they could be wished well. All in all, a very interesting read.



4. Dana Stabenow is well known for her mysteries. In "Blindfold Game," she branches out into a new direction.
   Taking her title from the Rudyard Kipling poem, "The Destroyers," Stabenow delves into the murky world of international intrigue, terrorism and politics. But Stabenow stays within the familiar confines of the Last Frontier, for the most part, with a few side trips to Washington, D.C., the Maritime Boundary Line and some minor side trips to South Korea, Thailand and London.
   It stars the CIA, the Coast Guard, environmental activists, the FBI and illicit Russian trawlers.
   Three childhood friends, who grew up together in a typical Alaskan village, all go into law enforcement: Hugh Rincon is an analyst for the CIA in Langley, Va.; Sara Lange, his estranged wife, is the executive officer on the Coast Guard cutter USS Sojourner Truth patrolling the Bering Sea; and Kyle Chase is an agent for the FBI in Anchorage. Their paths have diverged since growing up--even Rincon and Lange spend most of their 10-year marriage in different places. But in "Blindfold Game," their paths cross professionally--and dangerously.
   Rincon discovers someone is buying black market plutonium. It takes him a while, but he realizes the target is America--in fact, the target is Anchorage. His boss, an appointee with no desire to rock anyone's boat, doesn't believe him. That's pretty typical in a thriller plot.
   Eventually, he discovers that the Sojourner Truth is the only American asset that can stop the attack, but the risks are great that Lange will not survive.
   There's a lot going on in this book--international terrorists, bombings, piracy, double-and triple-crossing among the bad guys, death, dismemberment, torture, marital discord, career crises even the nature of old friendships come in for discussion. It's tiring, to be honest.
   And confusing. There are some plot points that just don't make sense--the book opens with a bomb exploding in Pattaya Beach, Thailand. No one in the novel understands the significance of the target--and neither does the reader. The explanation later--that it was a test run for the bigger picture involving Anchorage--is a bit too theatrical.
   The characters are well-drawn, and the reader can become emotionally involved in the outcome and their fate. They are also almost clichés in some ways: There's the guy who couldn't wait to get out of Dodge (Rincon), the girl who is torn between the land, the man and the job (Lange), and the guy who can think of no place else he'd rather raise a family (Chase).
   Stabenow has her details pretty well nailed down, especially when it comes to the Coast Guard. She spent 16 days patrolling with the USCG cutter Alex Haley as research for this book, and it shows. The scenes on Sojourner Truth are sharp and clear, easy to see and become a part of.
   But the rest--well, there's some work that needs to be done.
   Being a thriller fan, I've probably read hundreds of this type of book, by the well-known and barely known. So it was easy for me to find a few problems with the plot itself--most of the set-up is unbelievable. It seems improbable that two people with a wish (I won't get any more specific because I don't want to ruin it for readers) to foster and implement such a grand-scale and wide-ranging conspiracy could manage it alone, and their motive is flimsy and dubious.
   The set-up is long and involved, and the ending comes about way too quickly--like a snowball going downhill. Not only does it move fast, but it gets bigger and more difficult to believe with each foot.
   And the ending--well, let's just say it was unfulfilling. First on the "Huh?" list is the epilogue, when the powers-that-be are discussing the incident. With seven Americans dead, including a Coast Guard captain, and 13 wounded, not to mention the foreign nationals killed during the pirating, the bombing and subsequent military actions, I think the government would have looked really hard for a money source. Maybe they did, but Stabenow leaves us with this: "We don't know yet, sir. We have some leads, which we are tracing now, and ..."
   See what I mean?
   The other thing that really bothered me was the fact that the terrorists were successful, in that their "dirty bomb" was detonated, and civilians died--albeit it years later--as a result. The callous (and unmentionably stupid in these days of 24/7 news) reaction of the administration seemed unrealistic as well.
   And on a technical note; Stabenow needs a new editor. Not only were there numerous typos and other misspellings, but some fact-checking should have been done. When the bomb went off in Thailand, it had everyone wondering who was behind it, and the Irish Republican Army was named as a possibility. But the IRA had--before the cease-fire, anyway--as its goal to drive England out of Ireland. Bombing a restaurant in Thailand is not something that would have brought them closer to that goal. There are enough suspect organizations out there--one that is a viable threat would have been easier to swallow.
   Bottom line; If you're a Stabenow fan, you'll read this because you're a Stabenow fan. If you like thrillers, you might want to wait until she's a little more seasoned in this genre.



5. Mr. Smith and Mr. Jones are planning something big. The problem is, they are the only people who know the details. In fact, almost no one knows they even exist. CIA analyst Hugh Rincon does, however. He also has reason to believe that these two mysterious men were responsible for the explosion that killed a lot of people in Pattaya Beach, Thailand.
   
   As Hugh gathers information, he discovers that terrorists Smith and Jones plan to do some serious damage from somewhere on the Bering Sea to his home state of Alaska. The only way to stop them is to recruit the help of Coast Guard cutter, Sojourner Truth, where his wife is an executive officer.
   
   Dana Stabenow's BLINDFOLD GAME is a clever, first-rate, page-turner I couldn't put down. The plot, seemingly complicated at first, isn't confusing. Main characters, Hugh Rincon and XO Sara Lange, are strong, interesting, and well matched. Stabenow's attention to detail regarding life on board a U.S. Coast Guard cutter not only put me right in the story, but provided interesting information about the responsibilities and danger the Coast Guard faces. Stabenow's descriptions of a ferocious storm at sea had me holding my breath and grateful to be reading the book from the warmth and comfort of home.
   
   Having been to Anchorage recently, it was a treat to read about some of the spots I'd either been to or knew a little about. But it was even more of a treat to discover this award-winning author's work.

5 comments about The Great Terror: A Reassessment.

1. The Great Terror remains the cornerstone of any serious debate or study on Stalinist paradise on Earth even now , when a lot of new material has been made public ( e.g. S.S. Montefiore , E. Radzinsky etc.) .In spite of all this , the sheer bravery or Mr. Conquest's to stand firm against his too numerous opponents ,all leftists , all , beyond any logical comprehension ,with all the evidence here and now ,still following the ideals of bolshevism and communism regardless of its variations ( e.g. Ex - Yugoslav communism , Castro , all this being regarded as humane !? ), as this psychological phenomena is also well documented ( e.g. infamous saying by ' greats ' like B.Brecht on first ' trials ' : The more innocent they are , the more they deserve to die !? , Sartre , Shaw and a whole legion of 'serious ', professional historians like Webbs , all of them still regarded as the fighters for the soul of humanity . The reasons why for example fascism is so , rightly ,immediately regarded as synonym for the worst barbarity , a sort of the humanity's worst nightmare , while communism is still seen an innocuous , even benign , not worthy a bad remark , let alone a serious criticism , even though it has caused at least twice as many deaths , are also well and openly presented . In short , the starting point for any student of the 20th century barbarism based onThe Great Terror: A Reassessment the infinite trust in the goodness of man !



2. Which is more terrifying? Stalin's 1936-38 terror, or Western liberals' inability to recognize it? Updating his original work "The Great Terror" with a vast amount of new data, Conquest scrupulously details and puts into context the purges themselves: the many players and defendants, the shifting political cross-currents, the rounds of trials and arrests.
   
   And he does the same for the many Western observers - intellectuals, writers, journalists, and left activists - who were oblivious to it or actively sought to hush it up, even decades later when there were no longer any shreds of doubt. This is the equivalent of Holocaust denial.
   
   And a Holocaust it was. While left-wing apologists pooh-poohed the numbers of purge deaths as in the thousands, the estimates of those killed politically in the people's progressive utopia are now solidly in the eight figures, with as many as 15 to 20 million arrested and executed, or worked to death in the camps, in the years up until Stalin's death in 1953. As many more died were starved by the Communists in the Ukraine to break the peasantry a few years earlier. Yet most people seem never to have heard of any of this.
   
   In the Terror itself, Stalin and the NKVD prosecuted fictitious espionage, sabotage and subversion charges against millions of people. Those arrested would be tortured until they agreed to confess and implicate others. Most did, and quickly. It wound down only when the NKVD saw that, mathematically, every citizen of the nation would soon be implicated. But it flared up periodically until Stalin's death in 1953.
   
   The purges served several purposes. They transformed the USSR from a dictatorship of the proletariat into Stalin's despotism. They removed most previous party members and high-ranking officials, suppressing alternate notions of what Communism was about, and replaced them with ruthless Stalinists. Those persecuted included those who had been non-Bolshevik leftists, even if they since had conformed; Bolsheviks who had subscribed to Lenin's agricultural compromise delaying collectivization to boost agricultural production; Trotskyites; and finally, Stalinists and the NKVD themselves, for no ostensible reason but merely to terrify and cow.
   
   Stalin meanwhile could blame the country's Bolshevik-destroyed economy on the fictional sabotage "confessed to" in public trials, or to foreign spies. And he could blame the purge's excesses on the NKVD itself.
   
   We see the breakdown of figures and how they were derived: those executed with or without trial, those deported to slave labor camps, those executed in the camps, and those merely worked to death within them. The death rate for those sent to slave labor camps was around 90 percent. There are some camps whose mere existence cannot be confirmed firsthand because no one is known to have survived them to give testimony.
   
   This is an essential part of the anti-Communist canon, certainly on the top shelf. Conquest's work here confirms his original book and shows that its estimates, if off in any way, were too conservative.



3. It is, perhaps, an unfortunate aspect of cerebral function that we believe what we see and that which we don't see is proportionately less real. Consequently, we believe the horrors of Hitler's Holocaust. After all, we've seen the pictures. Unfortunately, although the Soviet Empire collapsed like a house of cards, it was never defeated. Hitler was defeated and his atrocities were revealed--graphically--to a shocked world. In that the Soviets weren't defeated their successors have managed to bottle up information--including any extant films--on the even larger Holocaust that was the Lenin/Stalin misrule and the Soviet Union itself.
   
   Fortunately, we have the witness of Solzhenitzin, Pasternak, Conquest and others...but we still don't have the pictures and, much like 'Arbeit macht Frei', 'Pictures make real'. It has therefore been possible for Communists, leftists and liberal sympathizers to deny one of the the most incredible massacres that the world has ever experienced.
   
   Conquest documents the motives and the mechanism behind it. In order to root out opposition and, in particular, to make everyone march in lockstep, Stalin and others kill almost as if their efforts were to fertilize the soil. Property owning farmers [kulaks] are imprisoned and killed causing the next rank of farmers to rise to the top. They are imprisoned and killed and the third tier floats to the top...then they are imprisoned and killed until finally you are left with a terrified basic population lowered to its basic common denominator. These are not the movers, shakers and doers of society. They are sheep for the shearing and Stalin shears them plenty. Granted they are the least productive members of society but that isn't important. Important is that the jump when ordered and ask 'how far' on the way up.
   
   The Lubyanka is a killing chamber and the gulag is stuffed with dying sufferers. The road to Kolyma is paved in bones. Conquest has worked the population figures--the census--and puts the murders at a minimum of 20 million although, some Russians put the count at three times greater. Except to the dead, it hardly matters. It is, after all, just statistics. As I write, Stalin's spiritual successor, the KGB thug, Vladimir Putin, is pushing armored columns deep into Georgia. He means to reconstruct the Soviet Empire on a sea of oil and blood. God help us if we take no action.
   
   Ron Braithwaite author of novels--"Skull Rack" and "Hummingbird God"--on the Spanish Conquest of Mexico



4. When the original version of this book was published it illicted skepticism from some (most?) Western scholarly and elitist circles, particularly from those ideologically and politically sympathetic to the Soviet bloc. Considering the sheer extent of the premeditated mass murder it documented, it is to some extent understandable that even the most die-hard Cold-Warriors were sometimes taken aback. Nonetheless, subsequent history and documentation has almost totally reinforced Mr. Conquest's original work, which was itself well-documented. For anyone interested in the Stalinist purges, it remains the basic text with which to begin. It remains a tragedy that the crimes it documents have not received nearly as much attention as the Nazi holocaust, but Mr. Conquest, at least, has done its victims some measure justice.



5. Instead of repeating other reviewers, I mostly focus on new information. To begin with, Robert Conquest implicitly rejects the argument that Communism was positive in that it modernized Russia. He comments: "But the old Russia had not been all that backward. It already had been the fourth industrial power before the Revolution." (p. 460). He also upends the myth of the insignificance of Lend Lease aid to the Soviet Union in WWII. General Zhukov is quoted as saying that, without it, "victory would have been impossible." (p. xviii).
   
   Conquest provides significant detail about the Katyn massacre (pp. 447-449). Tens of thousands of captive Polish officers and intellectuals were shot in cold blood in the spring of 1940. The author discusses the virtual absence of officers resurfacing after the Nazi-invasion-induced "amnesty" of Gulag Poles in 1941, Stalin's farcical lie about them all having escaped to Manchuria (December 3, 1941), the German revelation about the discovery of the Katyn graves in April 1943, etc. Of course, Katyn is only one location in the former Soviet Union where mass graves containing tens of thousands of victims have subsequently been found (p. 288).
   
   It has been argued that there was no Gulag equivalent to the Nazi death camps--no camps to which admission absolutely guaranteed death. In fact, there were: Novaya Zemlya, for example. (pp. 337-338).
   
   Some revisionists have attempted to downgrade the number of victims of the Gulags into the thousands, based on selected Soviet data. But Soviet archives are rife with falsification. (p. 460). There is no reason to suspect that data relative to the Gulags is any more reliable. (The fact that certain documents refer to essentials such as food is irrelevant. In fact, it is facile to order a certain amount of food and divide it among a large number of prisoners at near-starvation levels for each individual.)
   
   Conquest repeats his minimum estimate of 2,000,000 dead at Kolyma alone. (p. 325). He also refutes the revisionist attempts to downgrade the death toll of the Gulags in general, pointing to multiple interlocking sets of data that put the number of victims of the Soviet system into the tens of millions. (pp. 486-487).

4 comments about Unconquerable Nation: Knowing Our Enemy, Strengthening Ourselves.

1. The author (Brian Jenkins) writes, not only with authority, (but then who doesn't these days?), but also in a way that makes this debacle and it's potential solutions, (and ongoing difficulties), crystal clear to even a neophyte.
   
   I've read other of his works and this is, easily, not only his best but one that can also be read and understood quite clearly though the reader may be neither in the terrorism industry, (and it is, so deal with that reality), nor particularly interested in this field beyond mere daily survival and continuing ability to go about one's business relatively undisturbed.
   
   The book deserves a wider audience if only for its thoroughness, readability and pinpoint clarity about what has become an ever too real part of our daily lives.
   
   I've never written a review before... this author is truly talented in his ability to create understanding and a sense of personal efficacy, rather than consternation, where once concern and mystification may have resided.
   
   Kudos.



2. Mr. Jenkins seems to be very well qualified to write about this subject, since the study of terrorism has been his career at the Rand Corporation for many years. I like that he doesn't appear to support either political party; there's no finger pointing. Yet, he clearly states and explains what a big mistake it was to take out Saddam Hussein. First he tells us what and who we should be fighting. Instead of just merely saying that these 'folks' are very evil and should be eradicated, he explains what motivates them. We learn that our enemy has been brainwashed to believe that God wants them to kill or at least create havoc for all infidels (the West, their sympathizers and other nonbelievers in their militant brand of Islam). Jenkins doesn't have an opinion about whether or not we should now leave Iraq. Fighting this enemy won't be over whether we quickly leave Iraq or annihilate the entire country of Iraq or something in between these two scenarios. That's because our enemy is all over the world and won't be deterred by anything we do just in Iraq. We need to change the murderous thinking of our enemy. Sort of doing some reverse brainwashing. We need to work on breaking down their recruiting machine while also trying to physically destroy them and their supporters wherever in the world we discover them. The author accepts that 'winning' this war will take many years. The author has many suggestions how to go about doing this. We need to fight this war from many different directions. In the mean time, we need to get used to occasional horrible events happening. He doesn't think that our enemy (the Jihadists as he calls them) will try anything too horrific on us. If they launch nuclear weapons on us, then they know that we would return the favor by wiping out entire regions of the world where they reside; which will be counterproductive even to our death loving Jihadists. I personally am not so sure of this. I believe that our world may not survive if our enemy gets too far along with their weaponry. Nonetheless, I think the author's book should especially be read by our current and would be future national leaders. Also, those that plan to vote in our next Presidential election, or others that want to actively, in any way they choose, help the non-Jihadists win this war, should read this book. Our nation's future existence, as we know it, might depend upon following the approaches suggested in this book to eventually defeat the Jihadists and their way of thinking.



3. Brian Michael Jenkins is perhaps the number one US expert on terrorism and thus writes with almost peerless authority. Those who have studied the terrorism literature will know that he was the one who coined the much quoted phrase "terrorists want a lot of people watching, not a lot of people dead" back in 1975 (he revised this opinion later).
   
   Jenkins is also a good writer. This book reads easily and shouldn't be too hard to get through or too boring for anyone, I imagine. I recommend Unconquerable Nation without reservations as perhaps the best summary of the threat from terrorism at the present date.



4. In a glutted marketplace, discerning readers will scrutinize each new book about terrorism by asking why this specific volume has been written and what unique contribution it makes, as stated by Daveed Gartenstein-Ross of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Sadly, Jenkins's book fails to offer satisfactory answers to these questions. This is unfortunate because he is an experienced student of terrorism who over the years has made important contributions to the field.
   
   The first chapter sheds light on the volume's disjointed feel, explaining that the book is a collection of the briefings, memoranda, and essays that Jenkins, senior advisor to the president of the RAND Corporation, has written since 9-11. "Reviewing my own work," Jenkins states, "I find that certain basic themes recur." But the ten themes he lists are largely unrelated and do not comprise a coherent idea or theory.
   
   Jenkins does manage to organize the book loosely around the idea of how the United States can be an "unconquerable nation" in its battle against terrorism (the term is taken from a saying of Chinese strategist Sun Tzu, who argued that "being unconquerable lies with yourself"). Jenkins' main prescriptions are inner resolve or "stoicism in the face of threats," preservation of such American values as the prohibition of torture, and smarter, more effective counterterrorism.
   
   Although Jenkins's argumentation is overly sparse (the reader is frequently forced to take his word on assertions that are made without supporting evidence), his writing is lucid, and he makes many intelligent points. One of his more interesting observations involves the current threat "feedback loop" wherein analysts trumpet America's vulnerabilities in testimony and reports, and in turn, terrorists--who "do not live on another planet"--incorporate these vulnerabilities into strategic discussions. "When our intelligence in turn learns what terrorists are talking about," Jenkins observes, "the feedback loop is completed, seeming to confirm our own worst fears."
   
   Other interesting passages include an analysis of President George W. Bush's failure to mobilize the American citizenry to play a role in homeland security after 9-11, a counter-intuitive defense of the pervasive official press conferences about possible terrorist threats, and an explanation of advantages that could be gained by persuading detainees to publicly turn against Al-Qaeda. Yet such smart arguments should have been presented in shorter form: The book's desultory feel will disappoint all but the most dedicated readers.

2 comments about Holy Terrors, Second Edition: Thinking About Religion After September 11.

1. Lincoln's work is an attempt to formulate a theory of religion. While his success on that front is open to criticism, he gives an impeccable presentation of the religious dimensions of the American/Arab/Christian/Muslim/politics debate. Anyone who wants to hone their understanding of 80% of front page news should read this. Besides it gives documented proof of why Falwell and Robertson should not be listened to...ever...about anything.



2. I noticed Lincoln's book only because of the similarity of it's title to that of a biography of Andy Wharhol that I read some time ago. Sadly, the book is the perfect example of the contemporary academic practice of working backward from a socio-anthropological conclusion to a tendentious definition that can only lead the innocent reader to buy into the author's political prejudices. Readers wishing an objective analysis of the comparative social functionality of Islam and Christianity should read the Epilog to Anthony Pagden's Peoples and Empires.